This kind of thing should be banned in the west. Poor babies, metta to them.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

This kind of thing should be banned in the west. Poor babies, metta to them.

The persons who actually perform that vile act should be jailed, not just for endangering the child with an unhygienic procedure, but also for indecent contact with a minor. But it's America, and it could fall under that bit in the Constitution protecting 'religious freedom'. So I am sorry to say, it will probably just keep going on, so long as there are persons fanatical and twisted enough to put the words in an archaic book, above basic human decency.

Well I dunno, even though it's disgusting and inappropriate, I don't think there's a sexual element to it. To me, the problem is they are knowingly endangering the lives of their children, risking giving them brain damage, or at the very least herpes.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

BlackBird wrote:Well I dunno, even though it's disgusting and inappropriate, I don't think there's a sexual element to it. To me, the problem is they are knowingly endangering the lives of their children, risking giving them brain damage, or at the very least herpes.

I am not claiming to know whether the minds of the performers of that vile act have a sexual thought in them at that time, or not - only they can know that. But I will say that the children will probably be left with psychological scars from it, and so yes it is a form of child abuse, albeit sanctioned by religion.

Some might argue that it's ok, the babies won't recall the nasty man sucking blood from their penises. Well there are two ways to look at that. Firstly, some people can remember even very early events in life. Secondly, it can be the traumatic things that happened, that you can't recall, that can harm you the most. They can really impact on a person's psychological and emotional wellbeing later on.

Anyway, I've read this, said my bit, and will let it go now. There's Dhamma to cultivate. I agree with you that it has no place in our modern (or any) society.

kind regards

Last edited by manas on Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

BlackBird wrote:Well I dunno, even though it's disgusting and inappropriate, I don't think there's a sexual element to it. To me, the problem is they are knowingly endangering the lives of their children, risking giving them brain damage, or at the very least herpes.

I am not claiming to know whether the minds of the performers of that vile act have a sexual thought in them at that time, or not - only they can know that. But I will say that the children will probably be left with psychological scars from it, and so yes it is a form of child abuse, albeit sanctioned by religion.

They're babies man. I don't think they'll remember it.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

BlackBird wrote:Well I dunno, even though it's disgusting and inappropriate, I don't think there's a sexual element to it. To me, the problem is they are knowingly endangering the lives of their children, risking giving them brain damage, or at the very least herpes.

I am not claiming to know whether the minds of the performers of that vile act have a sexual thought in them at that time, or not - only they can know that. But I will say that the children will probably be left with psychological scars from it, and so yes it is a form of child abuse, albeit sanctioned by religion.

They're babies man. I don't think they'll remember it.

That can be said to justify other forms of abuse, sexual or not, of babies. On the safe side, it should be prohibited.

He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' (Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

Modus.Ponens wrote:That can be said to justify other forms of abuse, sexual or not, of babies. On the safe side, it should be prohibited.

It shouldn't be used to justify anything and I agree, it should be prohibited.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

Yeah, I read about it this morning and my first reaction was revulsion.

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

These disgusting things along with female genital mutilation and others is why I believe that religion can actually be harmful.

It is one thing to believe in fairy tales. But it is totally different to force one's views and practices on others, in this case on defenseless children. This is horrible!

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

Alex123 wrote:It is one thing to believe in fairy tales. But it is totally different to force one's views and practices on others, in this case on defenseless children. This is horrible!

I agree. Religious freedom is good, but not when it impinges on another person's freedom and/or safety; be it these acts (mentioned in this thread), female circumcision, child-brides, refusing to give medical treatment to your children (relying only on "prayer" to heal), etc. It is always the fanatics, the fundamentalists in all religions who go to these extremes and actually do harm against someone's will or to a child who has no say in the acts.

Sorry to be a devil's advocate here, but I think the whole thing has been blown out of proportion.

The injuries from what I could gather are extremely rare. The long-term consequences of being circumcised are not trauma and lack of sexual function, if anything they are positive or neutral. The sucking of the blood out is how it was done in ancient times to prevent infection (hasn't your grandmother done a similar thing after you cut your finger as a child?), and we should be careful not to project any sexualized notions onto it. This is our baggage, not necessarily theirs.

Of course it is tragic for the little one and the family. But do we ask our babies before we vaccinate them? I know people will cry out at this analogy - vaccination prevents disease and circumcision is just a barbaric tradition, right? Well, maybe we should examine our views and priorities and recognize that they are not absolute. Some people decry the use of vaccinations, even professionals. And to some, doing god's bidding is more important than life, let alone health. Are they necessarily poorer for it? I am not so sure.

The practice involves (unless I and the article are mistaken) putting one's mouth and saliva (filled with bacteria) onto an open wound on the babies penis. This is a medically dangerous practice, and it really doesn't matter how rare it is, 2 babies have died from it, and others have suffered brain damage.

That is enough in my opinion that the practice should be banned lest a third baby is taken from this world over an archaic religious ritual. I don't think one can place a value on human life, it is of infinite value in my opinion at least, and so the practice should be banned.

with mettaJack

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

I don't think anyone (as far as I can tell) said circumcision is barbaric, just that the way these cases are handled in unsanitary conditions. The "jury is still out" about the positive and / or negative impacts (if any) of circumcision. I think circumcision should still be allowed if the parents want to do this, but with sanitary conditions under the procedure of a medical professional.

Dan74 wrote:Sorry to be a devil's advocate here, but I think the whole thing has been blown out of proportion.

The injuries from what I could gather are extremely rare. The long-term consequences of being circumcised are not trauma and lack of sexual function, if anything they are positive or neutral. The sucking of the blood out is how it was done in ancient times to prevent infection (hasn't your grandmother done a similar thing after you cut your finger as a child?), and we should be careful not to project any sexualized notions onto it. This is our baggage, not necessarily theirs.

Of course it is tragic for the little one and the family. But do we ask our babies before we vaccinate them? I know people will cry out at this analogy - vaccination prevents disease and circumcision is just a barbaric tradition, right? Well, maybe we should examine our views and priorities and recognize that they are not absolute. Some people decry the use of vaccinations, even professionals. And to some, doing god's bidding is more important than life, let alone health. Are they necessarily poorer for it? I am not so sure.

The problem is that the child is not consenting to this practice. And medicine can probably prevent infection better than the way the radical jews are doing it. Of course it is very likely that there is no sexual motivation for this act. However, I see no reason, other than religious zeal, to perform this type of act after the circumcision.

The circumcision itself is horrible, imo. The child also has rights and, as David says, we can't let religious radicals impose their faith to their children in a way that offends their physical integrity. If adults want to pray to god and reject medicine to treat their illness, they have that right. But they can't impose that option on their children. The same with jehova's witnesses and blood transfusion. And the same with female and male circumcision.

He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' (Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

You all make valid points. I still hope one does not see this as a black-and-white issue and a little from "the other side". I did not have my children circumcised, contrary to my Jewish parents' wishes (their mother is not Jewish anyway and I am an apostate - what rabbi would consent to do the procedure!?), but I do respect people's beliefs and their devotion to the Word. If this latest tragedy gets them to adopt a safer practice, I am all for it. On the other hand to compare a ritual that carries a small risk to denying a life-saving treatment (or to female genital mutilation) is not what I expect from a colleague trained in logical inference

As parents we do make many important choices for the children. Some are just deemed more socially acceptable than others.

Dan74 wrote:You all make valid points. I still hope one does not see this as a black-and-white issue and a little from "the other side". I did not have my children circumcised, contrary to my Jewish parents' wishes (their mother is not Jewish anyway and I am an apostate - what rabbi would consent to do the procedure!?), but I do respect people's beliefs and their devotion to the Word. If this latest tragedy gets them to adopt a safer practice, I am all for it. On the other hand to compare a ritual that carries a small risk to denying a life-saving treatment (or to female genital mutilation) is not what I expect from a colleague trained in logical inference

As parents we do make many important choices for the children. Some are just deemed more socially acceptable than others.

Ok, it hasn't the same degree of severity, but it's the same principle. I lived with a friend (in a student apartment) who went through circumcision in his adult life and it was hellish for him. I still laugh when I remember what he had to do to take care of the "instrument".

I didn't know you were jewish. I have a great admiration for jewish culture in general. The best american comedians are jewish (by birth, I mean): Larry David, Jerry Seinfeld, Louis CK, Woody Allen and John Stewart. In mathematics the list is even more impressive: Paul Erdös, Alexander Grothendieck, Edward Witten, Grigori Perelman, etc. The first two are among my 3 favorite mathematicians of the 20th century.

EDIT: I'm not a colleague (yet).

He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' (Jhana Sutta - Thanissaro Bhikkhu translation)

I can empathise with your friend's story more than I can share here...

As for your second paragraph, unfortunately the converse is not true (ie if you are a great mathematician (comedian), there is a significant chance that you are Jewish, but if you are Jewish, there is only a very small chance that you are a great mathematician (comedian)!)

But my favourite Jewish comedian mathematician is Tom Lehrer, and if you don't know him, check him out (though he is not being fair to poor old Lobachevsky as it turns out)!

This kind of thing should be banned in the west. Poor babies, metta to them.

Circumcision of a minor should be banned unless for a medical reason. if an adult wants it done for religious purposes fine, but a minor should not be forced.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."